"••"V" 


WRIGHT  ON  QUANTITIES 

A  PLEA  FOR  A  BETTER  SYSTEM  OF  ESTIMATING 
COST   OF   BUILDINGS  IN  THE  UNITED   STATES. 


BY 
G.  ALEXANDER  WRIGHT 

(Member  San  Francisco  Chapter  American  Institute  of  Architects  ;  Member 

Technical  Society  of  the  Pacific  Coast ;   Honorary  Member  Quantity  Surveyors 

Association,  London;   (author  of  "Building  Arbitrations.") 


(Fifty  Cents  per  Copy. 


(By  the  Same  Author) 

BUILDING 
ARBITRATIONS 

(Second  Edition) 

A  Manual  for  Architects,   Students,    Contractors 

and  Construction  Engineers 

CONTENTS 

Chapter  1.  Introduction. 

"         2.  Building  Arbitration  and  its  Advantages. 

3.  Arbitration— Its  Place  in  the  Work  of  the  Architect, 

Contractor  and  Engineer. 

"         4.  Arbitrators — Their  Qualifications,  Duties,  etc. 

5.  The  Submission. 

"         6.  Mode  of  Procedure,  Evidence,  etc. 

7.  The  Award. 

8.  Arbitrators'  Compensation. 

WITH  THE  FOLLOWING  CONVENIENT  FORMS 
Demanding    Arbitration  —  Agreement    to    Submit    Differences  — 
Acceptance    and    Oath    of    Arbitrators    and   Umpire — Oath  and 
Affirmation  for  Witnesses — Notice  of  Hearing^and  Award,  etc.,  etc. 

':  Kjay  Mail' .04  b'aisr)! 


Copyrighted.  1913,  by 

G.  ALEXANDER  WRIGHT 

571  California  Street 

San  Francisco,  Cal. 


An  Address  given  before  the  GENERAL  CONTRACTORS'  ASSOCIATION, 
OF  SAN  FRANCISCO,  April  10th,  1913,  by  G.  ALEXANDER  WRIGHT, 
Architect. 


A    PLEA   FOR   A   BETTER  SYSTEM  OF   ESTIMATING 
THE  COST  OF  BUILDINGS. 


Before  touching-  on  my  subject  this  evening,  may  I  say  a 
word  or  two  to  those  gentlemen  present  whom  I  have  not  the 
pleasure  of  knowing  person-ally?  Although  an  architect  by  pro- 
fession, it  may  perhaps  be  stated  that  I  have  had  opportunity 
of  closely  studying  the  practice  of  estimating  upon  bills  of  quan- 
tities, or,  as  it  is  more  popularly  termed,  the  Quantity  System. 
Indeed,  it  is  a  subject  in  which  I  have  always  taken  an  active 
interest.  I  mention  this,  however,  simply  by  way  of  ex- 
planation, which  seems  to  be  necessary,  for  I  believe  this  is  the 
first  occasion  in  the  history  of  San  Francisco,  and  probably  in 
the  United  States,  when  a  practising  architect  has  been  honored 
with  an  invitation  to  address  a  body  of  contractors  upon  such  a 
practical  theme  as  Estimating — a  subject  which,  perhaps,  in 
some  quarters,  architects  are  not  supposed  to  know  much  about, 
and  I  regard  it  as  a  good  sign  when  a  contractor's  organization 
is  broad  enough,  and  progressive  enough,  to  invite  an  architect 
to  address  them  upon  such  a  practical  and  important  topic.  I 
regard  the  invitation  as  a  great  compliment.  It  gives  me  the 
greatest  pleasure  to  be  with  you  this  evening,  and  I  trust  that 
we  may  have  a  full  discussion  of  the  subject  at  the  close  of  my 
remarks. 

The  ever-increasing  amount  of  unproductive  time,  and 
usually  money,  which  contractors  are  called  upon  to  expend  in 
preparing,  gratuitously,  quantities,  as  well  as  prices,  often  for 
an  owner's  benefit,  suggests  that  the  time  has  arrived  when  all 
•concerned  should  take  up,  and  seriously  consider,  the  possi- 


bility'*o'f ; adopting  a:  moV&rrf-and  more  sensible  system  of  esti- 
mating, such,  for  example,  as  has  been  long  in  successful 
operation  in  older  communities.  Not  a  mere  copying  of  such 
methods,  for  I  advocate  the  creation  of  a  standardized  method 
of  our  own — an  American  system,  practical  above  all  things;  a 
system  that  will  be  in  line  with  our  otherwise  progressive  build- 
ing methods ;  a  system  that  shall  be  clear  and  accurate,  and  that 
shall  stand  for  square  dealing  between  contractor  and  owner — 
in  short,  a  system  that  shall  give  every  man  his  due,  no  more 
and  no  less;  a  progressive  system,  free  from  the  defects  of  other 
systems,  such  as  unnecessary  elaboration,  and  yet  one  that 
will  reveal  to  the  bidder,  at  a  glance,  the  actual  quantity  of 
material  and  labor  in-  a  structure,  in  any  individual  trade. 
When  bidders  are  invited  to  submit  bids,  they  are  theoretically 
asked  of  course  to  submit  competitive  prices,  but  in  actual 
practice  their  bids  are  based  upon  competitive  quantities,  be- 
fore the  competition  in  prices  commences ;  which,  in  my  opinion, 
is  as  unjust  to  the  contractor  as  it  is  ridiculous.  A  building  can 
only  contain  a  certain  amount  of  material,  and  no  amount  of 
figuring  by  contractors  against  each  other  can  make  that 
quantity  any  more  or  any  less.  Where,  then,  is  the  sense  in  a 
dozen  or  more  general  contractors  competing  against  each  other 
in  taking  quantities?  One  or  more  bidders,  through  being 
hurried,  or  being  unable  to  take  off  the  quantities  accurately, 
leaves  something  out.  What  happens?  Their  bids  are  conse- 
quently low,  and  the  owner  benefits,  at  the  low  bidder's  ex- 
pense, whilst  the  competent  or  more  careful  bidder  loses  the 
job,  because  his  quantities  are  more  accurate,  or  because  there 
may  have  been  room  for  uncertainty  when  figuring  the  plans 
and  specifications. 

Not  long  ago,  a  general  contractor  (whom  I  have  known 
over  twenty  years)  told  me  that  if  contractors  figured  to  do 
competitive  work  just  exactly  as  plans  and  specifications  called 
for,  a  man  would  not  get  "one  job  in  fifty."  Now,  if  this  is 
true,  and  personally  I  believe  it  is,  there  is  something  very 
rotten  in  our  methods.  In  my  judgment  it  lies  in  our  antiquated 
estimating  practices. 

Those  of  us  who  know  something  of  the  unsatisfactory 
conditions  under  which  bidders  are  often  obliged  to  figure, 

2 


time  after  time  without  result,  have  realized  that  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  dollars  in  time  and  money  are  taken  from  con- 
tractors' pockets  every  year,  simply  because  they  do  not,  so 
far,  limit  competition  between  themselves  to  the  matter  of 
prices.  They  go  on  competing,  and  I  suggest  gambling,  with 
each  other  as  to  the  quantity  of  material  a  building  will  take, 
whereas  I  contend  that  that  is  a  question  of  fact,  and  that  com- 
petition in-  the  quantities  between  contractors  never  can,  and 
never  will,  in  any  way,  change  the  fact  that  a  certain  fixed 
quantity  of  material  and  labor  is  necessary  to  do  every  job. 
There  can  be  no  legitimate  competition  in  taking  off  quantities 
of  materials,  except  that  unfortunate  competition  which  bidders 
make  themselves  when  they  take  off  too  much,  or,  as  too  often 
happens,  too  little. 

The  legitimate  competition  can  only  come  in  where  one 
man  can  handle  a  job  better  than  another,  or  one  man  may 
have  some  advantage  over  another  in  buying,  and  so  forth.  All 
this  kind  of  competition  is  legitimate  enough,  but  it  must  be 
obvious  that  no  amount  of  figuring  can  reduce  the  real  quantity 
of  material  which  a  building  will  take,  and  so  my  contention  is 
that  it  would  be  proper  and  fair  to  start  all  bidders  figuring 
upon  the  same  basis,  by  furnishing  each  with  a  schedule,  or 
bill  of  quantities,  showing  accurately  and  clearly  the  different 
quantities  and  kinds  of  materials  which  the  bidder  is  invited  to 
figure  upon;  and  even  then  there  would  be  plenty  of  com- 
petition left,  in  placing  profitable  prices  against  each  item. 

Our  present  method  (or  rather,  want  of  method)  in  esti- 
mating, and  the  rapid  strides  being  made  in-  construction,  are,  as 
I  have  said,  forcing  upon  the  contractor,  more  and  more  every 
year,  an  increasing  waste  of  time  and  money  in  figuring  out 
quantities.  This  senseless  waste  and  competition  cannot  go  on 
for  ever.  It  has  already  brought  men  to  bankruptcy  all  over 
the  country,  and  has  often  prevented  the  making  of  a  proper 
and  legitimate  profit  among  those  who  do  succeed  in  keeping 
their  heads  above  water. 

This  is  a  live  question,  and  it  deserves  the  earnest  con- 
sideration of  all  contractors'  associations  and  architectural  so- 
cieties from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific  Coast. 

3 


No  new  or  untried  principle  is  involved.  It  is  simply  that 
of  a  definite  quantity  of  work,  for  a  definite  amount  of  money. 
In  substance  the  owner  says,  "I  want  this  quantity  of  work 
done.  The  drawings  and  specifications  show  you  how  this 
quantity  of  work  is  to  be  assembled  or  put  together:  Now,  tell 
me  how  much  money  will  this  cost?  I  want  you  to  do  the 
quantity  of  work  called  for;  no  more,  no  less." 

At  present,  the  successful  bidder  often  says,  in  effect,  to  an 
owner,  "I  will  erect  your  building  according  to  plans  and 
specifications,"  but — mentally — he  says,  "I  do  not  figure  that 
it  will  take  as  much  flooring,  concrete,  plastering  or  painting 
as  my  competitors  think  it  will !"  Let  me  ask,  Is  this  a  proper 
or  fair  competition  between  contractors  themselves?  Is  it  fair 
to  their  own  interests?  There  is  only  one  individual  who  stands 
to  gain  anything  under  such  imperfect  methods,  the  owner,  and 
not  always  he. 

It  may  be  stated  that  the  Quantity  System  is  equally 
applicable  to  engineering  works,  such  as  railroad  work,  sewer- 
age disposal  schemes,  canals,  pumping  stations,  etc. 

Before  proceeding  to  a  further  consideration  of  this  sub- 
ject, I  may  be  pardoned  perhaps  for  expressing  the  opinion, 
after  having  had  over  twenty  years'  intimate  experience  with 
the  workings  of  the  Quantity  System  of  estimating,  and  over 
another  twenty  years  in  San  Francisco  (without  any  such  sys- 
tem), that  I  know  of  nothing  in  connection  with  the  work  of 
the  contractor  that  would  be  more  beneficial  than  the  adoption 
of  some  equitable  recognized  system  of  estimating  upon  bills 
of  quantities,  and  these  latter  would  be  equally  valuable, 
whether  sub-contracts  were  eventually  let  or  not. 

It  is  not  the  idea  that  we  accept  the  methods  of  any  par- 
ticular country — the  author  hopes  he  is  too  much  of  an 
American  citizen  to  suggest  that — but  where  contractors  in 
older  communities  favor  a  certain  system  to  the  exclusion  of 
the  very  thing  we  practice  here,  then  I  suggest  that  we  might 
well  stop  for  a  moment  and  take  notice  of  what  is  being  done. 
For  example,  in  the  year  1909  a  conference  was  held  in  Great 
Britain  between  the  National  Federation  of  Building  Trade 
Employers,  the  Institute  of  Builders  and  the  London  Master 

4 


Builders'  Association,  and  a  resolution  was  adopted  recom- 
mending contractors  who  were  members  of  these  powerful 
organizations  to  decline  to  bid  in  competition  against  each 
other,  unless  bills  pf  quantities  were  supplied  for  their  use  at 
the  owner's  expense.  A  deputation  from  these  contractors' 
organizations  afterwards  attended  before  the  principal  body  of 
architects,  who  promised  to  further  the  aims  of  the  contractors 
as  far  as  was  within  their  power;  and  today  the  Quantity 
System  is  in  full  operation,  not  only  in  the  case  of  private 
owners,  but  in  all  building  work  for  government  and  municipal 
authorities,  and  upon  the  principle  that  it  is  impossible  to  ob- 
tain accurate  bids  without  accurate  quantities. 

There  must  be  some  good  reason  for  all  this,  and  I  suggest 
that  it  is  worth  consideration  by  any  body  of  men,  architects 
or  contractors,  who  are  endeavoring  to  get  and  to  do  better 
work,  and  thus  elevate  the  building  business  to  the  honorable 
position  which  it  is  entitled  to  occupy,  and  to  bring  about  such 
conditions  as  will  cause  owners  to  hold  the  competent  architect, 
as  well  as  the  contractor,  in  higher  esteem,  and  not  regard  him, 
as  is  too  often  the  case  now,  with  suspicion. 

Now  let  us  consider,  for  a  moment,  a  few  of  the  disad- 
vantages of  existing  methods : 

First — The  time  usually  given  for  figuring  is  far  too  short 
for  the  accurate  taking  off  of  quantities,  in  addition  to  the  pric- 
ing and  figuring  out  of  the  many  items.  A  bidder  usually  has 
contract  work  in  progress,  and  other  matters  to  be  attended 
to  during  the  daytime ;  other  plans  are  to  be  figured  by  a  cer- 
tain time,  and  but  little  can  be  accomplished  in  the  eight-hour 
working  day,  and  so  advantage  must  be  taken  of  the  night 
hours,  sometimes  all  night,  and  even  Sundays  (as  I  happen 
to  know),  and  any  other  time.  Only  those  who  have  worked 
under  these  conditions  and  over  blue  prints  at  night,  hour 
after  hour,  taking  off  items,  can  appreciate  the  many  difficulties, 
pitfalls,  and  liability  to  error  through  figuring  against  time, 
after  the  real  work  of  the  business  day  is  over.  But  the  plans 
must  be  returned  first  thing  in  the  morning,  or  the  bid  must  be 
in  by  a  certain  hour  the  next  day.  Nothing  but  hurry — hurry — 
hurry.  In  not  a  few  cases  more  information  is  necessary;  some- 
thing is  not  quite  clear.  The  plans  and  specifications  do  not 

5 


agree  on  some  point.  Which  is  right?  There  is  no  time  to 
find  out,  the  only  person  who  can  enlighten  you  is  asleep,  per- 
haps, while  the  careful  estimator  is  burning  the  midnight  oil, 
and  wrestling  with  problems  which  can  be  avoided  and  entirely 
eliminated  under  a  more  modern  system  of  estimating. 

Again,  the  careful  bidder  who  honestly  tries  to  get  in  all 
the  items,  and  figures  to  do  the  work  as  called  for,  is  frequently 
beaten  by  a  less  competent  bidder,  who  forgets  something,  or 
who,  maybe,  is  willing  to  take  a  chance  anyway,  in  order  to 
get  the  job.  True,  omissions  in  lists  of  materials  are  sometimes 
unavoidable,  under  existing  methods,  which  unfortunately  aim 
at  speed  rather  than  accuracy. 

It  is,  to  say  the  least,  disappointing  to  a  careful  bidder  on 
a  large  job  to  find  his  bid  just  above  the  lowest,  and  after 
the  low  man  has  signed  up  the  contract,  it  develops  that  the 
painting,  or  some  such  item,  was  left  out.  This,  however,  could 
not  occur  with  the  Quantity  System. 

This  is  no  overdrawn  picture,  as  I  know  from  personal  ex- 
perience. The  competent  bidder  who  gets  in  all  his  items  to- 
day is  usually  under  a  disadvantage,  unless  he  happens  to  be 
figuring  against  men  of  his  own  stamp.  Meanwhile  it  would 
appear  that  the  chances  are  in  favor  of  the  owner,  most  of  the 
time,  and  it  seems  to  be  a  case  of  "heads  I  win,  tails  you  lose." 
Surely  it  is  time  there  was  a  change. 

The  existence  of  present  conditions,  whilst  much  to  be  re- 
gretted, is  due  to  a  blind  continuance  of  early-day  custom.  It 
is  in  no  way  up  to  date,  nor  conducive  to  progress,  nor  to  that 
business  success  to  which  a  bona  fide  contractor  is  entitled.  It 
is  entirely  unsuited  to  modern  construction  and  modern 
methods.  The  tallow  candle,  years  ago,  was  a  great  invention, 
but  how  many  of  us  would  light  our  homes  today  by  this 
method?  And  yet  our  estimating  methods  of  today  date  from 
the  same  identical  period  as  the  tallow  candle.  Other  countries 
have  long  ago  graduated  from  such  primitive  methods,  but  we 
are  content  to  stand  still,  and  we  are,  in  this  respect,  away  be- 
hind the  times.  It  seems  to  be  almost  inconceivable  that  shrewd 
business  men  are  still  willing  to  spend  their  time,  all  going  over 
the  same  ground,  figuring  against  each  other  on  quantities,  know- 
ing all  the  time  that  they  are  all,  save  one  (and  sometimes  even 

6 


that  one),  simply  wasting  their  time.  By  the  adoption  of  some 
sensible  system,  all  this  quantity  taking  could  be  done  by  one 
competent  person. 

The  great  difference  we  find  in  bids  arises,  in  my  opinion, 
not  so  much  in  tfre  prices  or  money  values  placed  against  the 
quantities,  as  it  does  from  errors  in  the  quantities  themselves, 
the  accurate  preparation  of  which  calls  for  special  training  and 
continuous  concentration  of  mind,  which  the  busy  contractor  of 
today  can  seldom  find  time  to  acquire. 

Now  we  will  investigate  a  bill  of  quantities,  such  as  we  are 
considering.  What  is  it?  and  how  is  it  used? 

First  of  all,  it  is  a  document,  handed  free  of  expense  to 
each  bidder,  lithographed  or  similarly  duplicated,  in  order  that 
all  bidders'  copies  may  be  exactly  alike.  It  will  contain  every- 
thing which  it  is  essential  for  a  contractor  to  know  when  mak- 
ing up  a  figure,  with  a  separate  section  for  each  trade,  such  as 
excavation,  concrete,  brickwork,  and  so  forth.  A  general  sum- 
mary is  provided  at  the  end  of  the  bill,  in  which  is  entered  the 
net  cost  of  each  trade;  this  summary  is  footed  up,  the  profit 
the  bidder  expects  to  make  is  added,  plus  the  cost  of  the 
quantities,  the  result  being,  of  course,  the  amount  of  the  bid. 

The  methods  of  measurement  must  conform  to  the  stand- 
ards used  by  each  individual  trade,  and  through  the  bill  the 
greatest  care  is  taken  to  have  everything  systematized;  all 
cubic,  square  and  lineal  feet,  and  numbers  of  items,  will  be 
found  all  together  under  their  respective  heads.  In  this  way, 
immediate  reference  may  be  made  to  any  item  required,  even 
though  the  entire  bill  may  contain  hundreds  of  items,  and  so 
every  item  has  its  proper  place — nothing  is  left  to  chance.  De- 
tail sketches  also  appear  in  the  margins  whenever  necessary, 
to  show  a  bidder  at  a  glance  what  is  required.  These,  as  we 
know,  are  of  more  value  to  an  estimator  than  the  long  written 
descriptions  one  sometimes  finds  in  specifications.  The  key- 
note of  the  Quantity  Surveyor  is  accuracy.  In  going  through 
the  drawings  and  specifications  he  has  come  across  all  those 
doubtful  questions  which  always  crop  up  when  figuring  under 
present  methods.  He  will  have  taken  them  all  up  with  the 
architect,  and  adjusted  them,  before  the  quantities  are  handed 
to  bidders,  so  that  everything  is  all  plain  sailing. 

7 


Nothing  is  "near  enough"  for  a  Quantity  Surveyor — he 
scrutinizes  every  part  of  the  work  closely,  clears  up  any  doubts, 
or  anything  capable  of  a  double  interpretation,  and  his  work 
leaves  no  loopholes  for  either  the  owner,  the  contractor  or  the 
architect  to  take  advantage  of.  The  result  is  that  it  is  seldom 
necessary  for  a  bidder  to  ask  questions  of  the  architect  when 
making  up  a  figure.  If  he  should  wish  to  do  so  probably  he 
would  be  referred  to  the  surveyor,  who  is  familiar  with  every 
minute  detail  of  the  work. 

Further,  and  right  here,  lies  one  of  the  greatest  advantages 
of  the  Quantity  System.  It  is  not  necessary,  except  in  a  gen- 
eral way,  for  a  bidder  to  study  the  drawings  and  specifications 
at  all,  and  he  certainly  does  not  have  to  figure  them.  He  simply 
prices  the  bill  of  quantities,  and,  in  these  days  of  hurry  and 
bustle,  this  is  as  much  as  a  contractor  can  be  expected  to  do  for 
nothing.  This  enables  the  competent  contractor  (the  one  who 
has  unit  prices  at  his  finger  ends)  to  make  up  a  bid  for,  say  a 
$100,000  building,  in  a  few  hours,  and  he  has  the  satisfaction  of 
knowing,  when  the  unit  price  is  placed  against  each  item,  that 
nothing  has  been  forgotten;  in  other  words,  he  only  contracts 
to  furnish  so  much  material  and  labor — and  surely  this  is  abso- 
lutely right  in  principle.  Good  reasons  exist  why  the  general 
contractor  should  have  faith  in  his  own  judgment  and  .accustom 
himself  to  price  items  in  every  trade  which  goes  to  make  up 
the  building  business.  It  is  the  only  consistent  method  of  esti- 
mating, for  anyone  who  claims  to  be  a  general  contractor. 
Experience  has  taught  most  competent  men  that  it  pays  to 
do  it.  The  mere  getting  together  of  figures  from  sub-bidders, 
and  footing  up  the  totals  of  the  lowest,  is  not  estimating  at  all. 
That  is  mere  schoolboy  work.  However,  I  am  led  to  believe 
that  this  is  now  the  exception  among  general  contractors  in 
San  Francisco  rather  than  the  rule.  The  ideal  contractor  is  the 
one  who  makes  up  his  own  estimates,  and  not  he  who  is  de- 
pendent, for  any  reason,  upon  sub-contractors,  who  thus  become 
the  real  estimators.  If  every  general  contractor  would  keep  a 
prime-cost  book  of  all  trades,  and  quantities  were  supplied  to 
him,  he  would  soon  be  in  a  position  to  give  a  fairly  close 
figure  upon  any  sized  structure,  without  first  taking  sub-bids, 
and  this  I  suggest  is  the  most  consistent,  satisfactory,  and 


profitable   method   to   pursue,    when   bidding   upon    work   as   a 
whole;  but  of  course  it  requires  care  and  experience. 

Further,  one  of  the  greatest  arguments  in  favor  of  letting 
contracts  as  a  whole^,  is,  of  course,  the  fact  that  a  general  con- 
tractor has  the  ability  to  figure  all  trades  in  his  own  office,  and 
that  he  knows  how  to,  and  will  supervise  the  work  of  sub- 
contractors, if  any.  If  architects  can  be  assured  of  this  being 
done,  it  would  be  better  for  all  concerned. 

In  general  practice  I  believe  the  accuracy  of  the  bill  of 
quantities  should  be  guaranteed.  Such  a  document  might  well 
be  made  the  basis  of  the  contract,  equally  with  the  drawings 
and  specifications ;  if  this  were  done,  the  chief  cause  of  disputes 
between  owner  and  contractor  would  be  removed. 

This,  I  submit,  is  entirely  logical  and  right — a  certain  quan- 
tity of  work  for  a  certain  sum  of  money,  the  owner  to  determine 
the  former  and  the  contractor  to  fix  the  latter.  Surely  this  is 
morally  just  and  fair. 

It  may  be  asked,  Where  are  these  competent  surveyors  to 
be  found?  And  it  would  be  a  natural  inquiry,  as  it  is  no  part  of 
the  duty  of  architects  to  prepare  such  quantities.  In  fact,  the 
relation  of  the  architect  to  the  contractor  should  preclude  him 
from  having  anything  to  do  with  furnishing  quantities.  This 
should  be  attended  to  by  a  disinterested  specialist — the  quantity 
surveyor.  In  older  countries,  young  men  of  education  are  now 
apprenticed  to  practising  surveyors,  and  it  has  become  a  recog- 
nized profession.  Years  ago  these  quantity  surveyors  frequently 
came  from  the  ranks  of  the  architects ;  others  possessing  the  nec- 
essary education  were  possibly  contractors,  building  superin- 
tendents or  estimators.  I  have  known  contractors'  representa- 
tives who  commenced  life  in  the  workshop,  who,  after  securing 
the  advantages  of  special  training,  made  experienced  and  very 
competent  quantity  surveyors.  There  must  be  a  beginning  to 
every  thing,  and  doubtless  there  are  many  men  in  this  country  who, 
after  some  little  training  in  the  technique  of  this  work,  should 
make  reliable  quantity  surveyors.  The  principal  qualifications 
are  honesty  of  purpose  and  a  knowledge  of  architecture  and  con- 
struction. The  surveyor  should  be  a  neat  draftsman  and  have 
actual  experience  in  conducting  building  operations.  He  should 

9 


possess  the  ability  to  readily  detect  discrepancies  or  conditions 
which  might  give  rise  to  misunderstandings  during  construction, 
and  last  but  not  least,  the  necessary  mentality  to  act  disinter- 
estedly. He  must  do  what  is  right  in  measuring,  as  between 
the  contractor  and  the  owner.  The  usual  custom  is  for  the  archi- 
tect to  furnish  the  quantity  surveyor  with  a  set  of  the  drawings 
and  a  draft  specification,  and  the  latter  then  commences  work 
in  his  own  offices.  During  this  period  the  architect  and  sur- 
veyor are  in  frequent  consultation,  to  the  end  that  all  uncertain- 
ties are  cleared  up  and  adjusted  upon  the  drawings  and  specifica- 
tions. In  short,  no  effort  is  spared  to  obtain  perfect  clearness  and 
accuracy  before  bidders  commence  figuring. 

Such  uncertainties  are  bound  to  crop  up ;  they  are  unavoid- 
able. They  nevertheless  perplex  the  contractor  when  he  is  fig- 
uring, and  his  foreman  on  the  job,  and  create  unnecessary 
trouble  and  sometimes  bitter  disputes;  and  then,  in  such  cases, 
one  of  the  parties  to  the  contract  is  usually  a  loser. 

Now  that  we  have  briefly  considered  the  qualifications  of 
a  quantity  surveyor,  let  us  take  note  of  what  the  preparation  of  a 
bill  of  quantities  involves.  It  may  well  be  said  that  during  the 
last  forty  years  it  has  been  brought  to  a  mathematical  science, 
and  yet  it  is  really  surprising  what  a  vague  idea  exists  concern- 
ing the  methods,  objects  and  uses  of  the  Quantity  System.  The 
fact  remains,  however,  that,  where  the  system  has  been  adopted, 
responsible  contractors  refuse  to  figure  without  it.  Some  day 
that  will  be  the  attitude  of  contractors  in  this  country — when 
they  fully  realize  the  folly  of  wasting  their  time  and  money  in 
competing  against  each  other  on  quantities  as  well  as  on  prices. 

But  to  return :  Three  distinct  processes  are  involved,  and 
each  process  calls  for  different  operations. 

First — "Taking  off"  and  entering  every  item  (or  "dimen- 
sion," as  it  is  called)  upon  the  dimension  sheets.  This  is  always 
done  in  exactly  the  same  order,  in  every  building;  no  dimension, 
however  small,  is  omitted — no  guess-work  of  any  kind  is  per- 
mitted. The  exact  location  in  the  building  of  every  dimension 
taken  is  carefully  noted,  and  every  figure  or  note  taken  is  care- 
fully preserved  for  future  reference. 

It  is  impossible  to  illustrate  here  the  work  in  detail  involved 

10 


in  taking  off  each  trade,  but  the  following  may  serve  to  show 
the  general  idea:  Let  us  follow  a  surveyor  for  a  moment  in 
taking  off  his  dimensions  for  a  few  items  of — we  will  say  com- 
mon brick  work.  He  always  commences  taking  dimensions  at 
the  same  point  on  each  floor  plan;  every  length  of  wall  from 
one  angle  to  the  next  is  measured  separately  and  the  dimensions 
entered  in  "waste,"  as  it  is  termed.  We  will  assume  that  it  takes 
say  fourteen  dimensions  to  go  clear  around  a  building — these 
fourteen  dimensions  and  their  locations  are  permanently  re- 
corded, footed  up,  and  the  total  lineal  feet  is  then  placed  imme- 
diately below  this,  and  a  line  drawn  across  the  column  to  sep- 
arate it  from  the  next  item.  The  dimension  is  squared,  i.  e.,  the 
number  of  square  feet  these  figures  represent  is  figured  out,  and 
opposite  to  the  total  we  find  a  description,  thus,  for  example : 
21-inch  wall  of  standard  common  brick  work  laid  up  with  lime, 
mortar  and  Portland  cement,  gauged  three  to  one,  pointed  with 
flat  joints  one  side  for  whitewash  and  raked  out  the  other  side 
for  cementing. 

In  good  practice  it  might  be  best  to  give  the  number  of 
square  feet  superficial  of  wall,  and  give  the  thickness.  The  same 
method  is  adopted  with  each  story,  with  its  varying  thicknesses 
of  walls,  every  dimension  being  entered  in  precisely  the  same 
order,  with  its  particular  location  noted. 

Then  we  come  to  deduction  of  openings.  Those  with  inside 
and  outside  reveals  (as  in  the  case  of  box-frame  windows)  are 
taken  separately,  door  openings  the  same.  Those  of  one  size 
and  one  thickness  of  wall  are  "timesed,"  as  we  say,  and  entered 
Mn  the  dimension  column,  so:  "Ddt.  9/3  feet  9  inches  x  7  feet  13 
nch  outside  wall,  fifth  floor." 

Then  should  follow  an  item,  "extra  labor,"  to  so  many  8- 
inch  common  brick  segment  arches  in  say  three  half-brick  row- 
locks to  4-foot  6-inch  openings  with  3-inch  rise  in  8-inch  wall, 
include  for  cutting  skewbacks,  etc.,  and  for  wood-turning  piece 
and  setting  and  striking.  In  case  richer  mortar  was  specified  for 
arches,  it  would  be  so  stated,  and  the  proportions. 

When  rough  cutting  to  brick  work  is  required,  every  square 
foot  of  it  would  be  measured.  Brick  work  in  footings  or  founda- 

11 


tions,  or  walls  below  ground  or  at  unusual  heights,  should  be 
all  segregated  and  given  separately,  with  full  descriptions. 

Such  items  as  the  following  are  then  taken  by  the  square 
yard  or  square  foot — viz.,  selected  common  brick  facing.  If 
joints  are  struck  and  cut  (as  face  work),  it  is  taken  as  a  separate 
item,  as  should  be  the  case  with  any  portions  that  are  to  be 
pointed  with  special  or  colored  mortar.  Cementing  by  the  square 
yard  if  on  ordinary  plain  surfaces,  but  if  in  widths  of  12  inches  or 
under,  then  this  is  separated  and  taken  by  lineal  foot ;  should  this 
work  occur  on  circular  surfaces,  it  would  be  so  described,  kept 
separate,  and  the  radius  given.  Lineal  dimensions  are  taken  of 
all  rough  splays  and  chamfers,  flues,  pointing  to  flashings,  pro- 
jecting courses,  with  the  number  of  mitres,  splays,  or  stops  in 
same;  brick  sills,  with  the  returns,  are  numbered,  if  any.  The 
labor  of  forming  quoins,  square  or  splayed,  and  (in  certain 
cases)  the  lineal  feet  of  plumbing  angles  and  reveals,  might  be 
taken,  also  leveling  up  for  joists,  bond  iron  and  the  like. 

The  foregoing  applies  to  common  brick  work,  as  before 
stated.  Now,  where  "face"  brick  are  used,  the  entire  surface  of 
such  facing  is  measured  by  the  square  foot,  including  reveals  and 
soffits  (but  openings  deducted),  the  kind  of  mortar  and  the 
labor  of  pointing  being  given.  Here  would  be  taken  such  items 
as  face  arches.  Fair  cutting  by  the  square  foot  on  same  prin- 
ciple as  mentioned  for  common  brick  work.  Then  come  lineal 
feet  of  each  course,  of  which  figured  sketches  should  appear. 
Raking  mouldings  or  belts  separate;  then  follow  the  number  of 
external,  internal,  raking,  skew  or  other  mitres ;  also  square  ends, 
etc.  (if  any).  All  other  lineal  feet  items  follow  in  their  proper 
order,  and  then  in  a  similar  way,  concluding  with  numbered 
items,  which  would  be  described  and  (if  necessary)  sketched  in 
the  margin.  I  am  aware  that  this  is  but  a  very  elementary  illus- 
tration of  the  detailed  method  of  taking  off,  but  the  principle 
applies  throughout  every  department,  in  every  trade,  from  the 
excavator  to  the  painter,  but  it  would  be  too  great  an  under- 
taking to  go  fully  into  details  here  in  each  case. 

Surveyors'  quantities  are  usually  measured  net,  and  it  is 
so  stated  in  the  preamble  of  the  bill — upon  the  understanding 
that  the  unit  price  for  each  item  is  to  be  made,  by  the  contractor, 
to  cover  trade  customs,  etc.,  which  differ  in  each  locality. 

12 


The  before-mentioned  dimension  sheets  are  usually  checked 
over  with  the  drawings  by  a  second  person,  and  then  all  totals 
are  abstracted;  that  is  to  say,  they  are  transferred  to  abstract 
sheets,  under  separate  headings.  In  this  way  many  similar  items 
of  the  same  value  are  collected  together  and  footed  up  and 
checked.  This  reduces  the  number  of  items  which  appear  event- 
ually in  the  finished  bill,  which  is  written  direct  from  those  ab- 
stract sheets,  and  any  further  sketches  or  descriptions  necessary 
for  the  bidder  to  thoroughly  understand  what  is  required  are 
then  finally  added.  When  completed,  a  sufficient  number  of 
copies  of  these  bills  are  lithographed,  or  otherwise  duplicated, 
and  a  copy  is  sent  by  the  surveyor  to  the  list  of  prospective  bid- 
ders, whose  names  and  addresses  have  been  previously  furnished 
him  by  the  architect. 

Some  of  the  advantages  of  the  Quantity  System  of  esti- 
ating  to  the  contractor  are  as  follows : 

1.  Saving  of  time  and  money. 

2.  Greater  precision  in  measuring. 

3.  No  uncertainty  as  to  interpretation  of  plans  or  specifications 
(the  quantities  should  govern). 

4.  No  visits  to  the  architect's  office  when  figuring,  for  explana- 
tions or  otherwise. 

5.  No  other  work  is  contracted  for  except  the  quantity  set  forth 
in  the  quantities. 

6.  The  contractor,  if  he  so  desires,  can  check  up  the  quantities 
before  signing  a  contract.     In  an  American  system  of  esti- 
mating, the  quantities  should,  I  think,  form  part  of  the  con- 
tract. 

7.  No  bidder  can  inadvertently  leave  out  anything,  and  so  in  this 
way  arrive  at  too  low  a  figure. 

8.  Not  having  to  spend  time  taking  out  his  quantities,  the  con- 
tractor has  time  to  attend  to  more  profitable  business. 

9.  Systematically     arranged     bills     of     quantities     duly     priced 
(whether  work  has  been  secured  or  not)  form  excellent  data 
for  making  future  estimates. 

13 


Before  an  American  system  can  be  put  into  operation  it  will 
be  necessary: 

First — That  a  committee  of  representative  contractors  be 
selected  to  standardize  a  method  of  measurement  to  be  univer- 
sally followed  by  all  contractors  and  architects. 

Second — That  competent  men,  mutually  satisfactory  to  con- 
tractors and  architects,  be  retained  in  such  numbers  as  the  vol- 
ume of  work  may  demand.  These  men,  or  quantity  surveyors, 
could  be  placed  under  bond,  covering  their  competency  and  in- 
tegrity until  they  have  been  proved  and  assured ;  such  appoint- 
ments to  be  permanent,  except  for  good  cause;  the  compensa- 
tion of  these  surveyors  to  be  fixed  at  a  certain  percentage  upon 
the  total  of  each  estimate;  each  bidder,  of  course,  adding  this 
amount  to  his  bid. 

Third — I  suggest,  also,  that  a  law  be  passed  requiring  that 
a  bill  of  quantities  be  furnished  (free  of  expense  to  bidders)  upon 
all  State  and  other  public  buildings.  I  advocated  this  as  far 
back  as  the  year  1893,  and  it  may  interest  you  to  know  that  such 
a  law  is  actually  in  effect  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  and  has 
been  since  1895.  It  does  not,  however,  go  quite  far  enough,  as  the 
quantities  furnished  have  no  guarantee  as  to  their  accuracy. 
Quantity  question  is  attracting  much  attention  at  the  present 
moment  among  contractors  in  Boston,  New  York  and  other 
cities,  and  I  may  mention,  perhaps,  that  a  program  is  now  being 
formulated  to  bring  this  Quantity  System  question  to  the  atten- 
tion of  every  building  contractors'  association  and  every  archi- 
tects' society  in  this  country. 

Fourth — In  connection  with  the  Quantity  System  I  still  advo- 
cate (as  I  did  in  a  brochure  on  arbitration  which  I  published  in 
1894)  the  creation  of  a  technical  tribunal,  or  court  of  arbitra- 
tion, where  nothing  but  building  suits  and  disputes  shall  be  de- 
termined and  adjusted.  (See  also  the  American  Architect,  April 
13,  1901.)  Such  court  is  to  be  presided  over  by  a  specially  se- 
lected judge  and  at  least  two  other  persons  of  practical  expe- 
rience in  the  actual  construction  of  buildings,  and  in  estimating 
the  value  of  builders'  work,  and  familiar  with  building  trade  meth- 
ods, terms,  processes  and  customs.  I  maintain  that  such  technical 
matters  as  building  construction,  values,  etc.,  should  not  be  de- 

14 


cided  solely  by  technical  law,  nor  by  laymen  alone,  however 
skilled  in  other  ways,  notwithstanding  the  custom  of  calling 
expert  witnesses  before  them.  I  consider  that  it  would  be  an 
advantage  to  disputants  if  a  majority  on  the  bench  had  a  first- 
hand practical  knowledge  of  building  construction  and  methods, 
such  as  I  have  indicated,  where  technical  disputes  might  be  de- 
termined in  a  few  days,  once  and  for  all,  and  without  delays, 
which  only  tire  the  contractor  out  and  thereby  force  him  to 
accept  a  settlement  more  or  less  unjust,  from  a  practical  stand- 
point. 

I  am  hoping  to  shortly  see  a  committee  appointed  in  every 
building  employers'  organization  in  this  country,  to  take  up 
and  seriously  consider  such  matters  as  I  have  touched  upon  this 
evening.  Nothing,  in  my  judgment,  will  tend  to  elevate  the 
building  business  and  to  promote  a  feeling  of  mutual  confidence 
and  respect  between  the  architect,  the  contractor  and  the  owner 
more  than  the  Quantity  System  of  estimating,  which,  as  I  think  I 
have  shown,  aims  at  absolutely  square  dealing  between  the  man 
who  pays  for  the  structure  and  the  man  who  builds  it. 

Gentlemen,  I  fear  I  have  kept  you  too  long,  but  I  hope  there 
will  be  a  full  discussion  of  the  subject.  In  what  I  have  said,  be- 
lieve me  it  is  prompted  solely  by  practical  experience  and  a  sin- 
cere desire  to  see  better  estimating  methods  adopted. 

In  conclusion,  during  a  recent  trip  East  and  to  Europe,  it 
was  my  privilege,  through  your  courteous  secretary,  to  be  kept 
in  touch  with  your  activity  and  the  progress  recently  being  made 
by  this  organization.  I  wish  to  extend  to  your  president,  direct- 
ors and  members  my  sincere  congratulations  upon  the  progres- 
sive methods  you  have  so  far  adopted,  and  to  tender  you  my  best 
wishes  for  continued  success. 

I  would  like  to  add,  as  President  Wilson  is  reported  to  have 
put  it  recently,  that  "nothing  is  done  today  as  it  was  done  twenty 
years  ago."  That  is  the  essential  fact.  I  read  somewhere  the 
other  day  that  this  age  we  are  living  in  today  is  a  new  age,  an 
age  in  which  everybody  all  over  the  world  is  doing  new  things, 
with  interesting,  important,  wonderful  new  devices,  new  meth- 
ods, new  machines  to  make  new  products;  new  proofs  of  the 

15 


power  of  the  human  mind  to  conceive  and  to  control,  and  the 
human  hand  to  construct  instruments  with  which  to  conquer  the 
forces  of  nature  and  bring  them  to  the  service  of  humanity — 
these  are  the  characteristics  of  the  age  we  live  in.  Never  have 
the  creative  forces  of  mankind  moved  so  fast  as  in  the  lifetime  of 
us  who  are  now  on  earth.  Never  before  have  there  been  so 
many  people  in  the  world  eager  to  know  what  the  world  is  doing 
and  how  it  is  doing  it. 

Gentlemen,   I   thank  you. 


NOTE — The  Author  will,  upon  application,  be  pleased 
to  send  a  copy  of  this  pamphlet  free  of  charge,  for  library 
purposes,  to  the  Secretary  of  any  Chapter  of  the  American 
Institute  of  Architects,  or  of  any  other  Architectural  or 
Students'  Society.  Also  to  the  Secretary  of  any  Engineering 
Society,  or  Builders'  Exchange,  Contractors'  Association, 
or  similar  Organization. 


16 


BUILDING  PRESS  NOTICE. 


The  May  (1913)  number  of  the  General  Contractors'  Association  Review, 

of  San  Francisco,  has  the  following: 


THE  QUANTITY   SYSTEM. 

On  April  10th,  Mr.  G.  Alexander 
Wright,  architect,  addressed  the  Associa- 
tion on  the  very  interesting  subject  of 
"Quantity  Estimating," 

The  large  attendance  present  at  the 
meeting  testified  to  the  interest  taken  in 
the  subject,  and  while  for  many  reasons 
it  may  not  be  practical  or  possible  to  get 
this  plan  of  estimating  work  adopted  in 
the  architects'  offices,  it  is,  nevertheless,  a 
subject  upon  which  the  contractors  should 
be  fully  informed,  and  it  is  worthy  of 
note  that  a  large  number  of  the  big  con- 
tractors in  this  city  today  are  employing 
estimators  to  assist  them  in  figuring  their 
work. 

We  now  have  several  associate  members 
in  the  Association  who  are  quantity  esti- 
mators of  more  or  less  experience,  and 
two  have  joined  during  the  last  month, 
Mr.  Wright  himself  having  induced  one 
of  them  to  make  application  for  member- 
ship, with  a  view  to  his  services  being  of 
use  to  the  members  on  the  floor. 

Mr.  Wright,  in  his  address,  did  not 
recommend  a  mere  copying  of  the  methods 
in  use  in  England,  but  rather  suggested 
an  American  system  which  would  be  prac- 
tical for  local  conditions. 

At  the  close  of  the  address  numerous 
intelligent  questions  were  asked  Mr. 
Wright,  and  a  number  of  those  present 
seemed  to  favor  the  system,  having  worked 
under  it  in  other  countries. 

The  objection  is  made  that  the  owners 
could  probably  not  be  induced  to  pay  the 
fee  for  a  quantity  survey  on  their  job  be- 
fore it  is  put  out  for  figures.  Then,  too, 
it  is  thought  by  some  that  the  architect, 
with  quantities  of  the  work  in  front  of 
him,  might  be  tempted  to  go  still  further 
into  the  contracting  business  than  some  of 
them  have  already  seen  fit  to  do,  and  that 
the  information  might,  therefore,  be  used 
to  the  disadvantage  of  the  contractors.  Of 
course,  conditions  vary  in  different  coun- 
tries and  different  localities,  and  while 
there  may  be  some  architects  here  who 


would  take  advantage  of  obtaining  infor- 
mation as  to  the  quantities  of  work  and 
material  in  their  buildings,  there  would 
probably  not  be  many  of  such,  and,  in  any 
event,  it  is  finally  the  question  of  cost 
which  must  settle  the  awarding  of  a  con- 
tract; and  it  is  a  well  known  fact  that 
some  contractors  are  able  to  obtain  slightly 
better  prices  than  others  for  their  ma- 
terials, and,  again,  others  are  able  to  con- 
struct buildings  at  a  less  cost  than  others, 
owing  to  their  more  efficient  management. 

One  thing  is  certain — if  all  architects 
thought  and  dealt  squarely  and  honestly 
the  adoption  of  the  system  would  undoubt- 
edly be  of  advantage  to  all  the  contractors. 

It  may  be  well  to  state  that  this  system 
of  estimating  is  now  under  consideration 
by  other  organizations  of  builders  in  other 
parts  of  the  country,  and  there  seems  to 
be  a  general  tendency  among  up-to-date 
contractors  throughout  the  country  to 
adopt  a  more  careful  and  accurate  system 
of  estimating  the  cost  of  a  contract.  The 
old  days  when  a  contractor  practically 
cubed  up  a  building  and  put  in  his  bid, 
trusting  to  good  fortune  to  make  a  profit 
on  the  work,  have  gone  by.  More  money 
is  spent  for  plumbing  fixtures,  electric 
lights,  fixtures,  wiring,  etc.,  today  than 
was  ever  thought  of  twenty  years  ago, 
and  the  man  who  roughly  estimates  the 
cost  of  a  building  at  this  time  gets  a  job 
only  when  he  has  made  a  mistake. 

The  system  is  no  experiment,  and  is 
being  followed,  and  has  been  followed,  for 
years  past  in  several  countries  of  the 
world,  and  the  Association  owes  a  vote  of 
thanks  for  the  intelligent  and  courteous 
manner  in  which  Mr.  Wright  placed  the 
subject  before  the  stockholders.  However, 
he,  himself,  states  that  it  is  impossible  to 
attempt  to  give  a  thorough  understanding 
of  the  question  in  one  lecture. 


Readers  are  also  referred  to  "The  Amer- 
ican Architect,"  of  January  23,  1897,  page 
27     ''Estimating    on    Bills    of    Quantities, 
and  of  May  28,  1898,  "Quantity  Surveying,' 
and  to  other  articles  by  the  author  in  the 
same  magazine. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


30w-l,'15 


PWStt? 

inHH 


YC  14773 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


